"New Age" (and Other Threatening Concepts) ...Defined

The concept "New Age" is being used like garlic to Dracula around the boards, as if to ward off some latest fad threatening to overtake modern science and rational processing.

Let's address concepts such as "New Age" and similar, here, exposing them for what they REALLY are, to evolve beyond such feared labels of convention, to get past them, so reality can be discussed from a place of *balance.*

Here's a really good article, "Narcissistic Leaders and their Manipulation in Group Dynamics" ( http://www.energeticsinstitute.com.au/page/narcissistic_group_dynamics.html ) which talks about the narcissism of New Age culture. Here are some excerpts:

"Writers such as Scott Peck(1983), Ransky(1998), Cawthorne(1991), Ritchie(1999), and others see the New Age spiritual movement as a form of narcissism, and this is why it attracts so many narcissistic adherents. They collectively argue along the lines that follow. New Age philosophy is predicated with the idea that there is no personal god, hence you are not answerable or accountable to any other deity or higher power than yourself, or some universal life force. There is no sin, no need for shame, no evil, all of which are constructs of a controlling, scandal ridden church state. We each are elevated to being gods, we just need to realise that and become that. Once we start behaving as gods(which is the narcissistic aim or goal), we are liberated. We do not need to apologise to anyone, nor have conscience beyond the concept of a positive intention.

"If in your pursuit of godhead, you run over someone else and damage or offend them, then well, too bad, that’s their stuff, karma or issue, and you are not accountable to them, only yourself. You are better placed to yell at them “stop being a victim!!” as you drive off down the road as that is an enlightened awareness they obviously need.

"We are all one but in that I am number one and if the universe has not proven infinitely abundant to you, well then that’s your stuff, but keep your hand off my stash!! This is all narcissistic in the extreme but it’s now the prevailing myth and replacement for authentic spiritual discipline that most lazy westerners embrace. No need for discipline or restraint in this path, it’s just what you want, when you want it, as the universe is abundant and infinite. This is narcissistic heaven, but now plagues us in society with its extension now being felt everywhere, where everybody has all personal freedoms and rights, but let’s not talk about the equally relevant responsibilities. Personal responsibility has broken down from this place, and the New Age movement is a key driver in this change(Meier:2009). Many personal transformations programmes use these new-age narcissistic constructs(Tucker:1999).....

"New agers tend to retreat into unaccountable explanations from channelled spirits or dubious quantum physics principles which are hard to challenge, and even harder to understand for average folk, when challenged on hard ethical questions(Ransky:1998). There is no consensus about the role of spirit and consciousness in quantum physics, or even that quantum physics principles exist above the sub-atomic level of reality(Wolf:2003). New Agers create facts where there are none, turning faith into objective fact, and narcissists are not far behind(Ransky:1998). "

NoetPoet, you have once again shown me how little you know about a topic you so readily bash, "New Age "spirituality" is nothing more than a pick-and-choose buffet of OLD ideas; beliefs can vary significantly from one New Ager to another."

This is utterly laughable, you obviously have no I idea why though...WOW!!

The more I read the more I realise how little you know about an ideological principle you bash so often, you're not fair dinkum are you? You couldn't possibly be unless you are of the extreme dogmatic within your own ideological principals.

Do you know why it is pointless to intelligently reason with an extremist of any ideology? One, they will want to dominate over all else and use any means no matter how ridiculous and childish it is. Two, any other ideological principle doesn't count unless it conforms to the same fixated reasoning as the extremist ideology. In this case, every other ideological principle has to conform to science logics and reasoning when it is obvious other ideological principles are needed as well to formulate an accurate deduction. The world doesn’t function and exist by one ideological principle therefore other ideologies need to be considered within the equation.

I found the following article quite interesting; it relates so much to this discussion board it’s not funny if I’m here or not.

Extract: Confirmation BiasSo you might start out fairly normal in your political or religious beliefs, but then fall prey to a number of psychological effects that can lead you to fall deeper down the rabbit hole. The first of these is confirmation bias. This basically refers to our tendency to ignore information that contradicts our beliefs and to only take on board that information that confirms it and enforces it. To stay moderate you need to 'seek out' the opposite view, but what many people will do instead is to read magazines and books that confirm their beliefs and only listen to the one side of the story. Of course this will then more and more cause you to become increasingly certain of your beliefs, and potentially, ultimately delusionally so.

Religious Zeal

As you then begin to become somewhat fanatical about a subject you can start to experience an extreme emotional response when you are preaching your cause or engaging in your practice. This is often referred to as a religious zeal, but people have been shown to have similar firing in the brain when watching football matches, or when singing a patriotic song. At this point the emotion then becomes a reinforcing factor that means you start to associate your extreme view with powerful positive emotions meaning that you become almost 'addicted' to your cause and get an almost 'high' from it.

"It is obvious that the dictionaries are once again wrong, would it matter what evidence I came up with to support my claim? If anyone is dogmatic within their own ideological principals, not by the sounds of it so there is obviously no point!!"

Stop making excuses and cough up some evidence, otherwise quit spamming these boards with unsubstantiated nonsense.

"The religious Dark age; did they not have the same mentality, everything else of any other ideological principle was wrong no matter what evidence one supplied. The similarities between Dark Age religious mentality and modern day science mentality are quite noticeable but only to people who aren't dogmatic it would seem which I find quite interesting. Take a close look at the replies, it says it all I'm afraid."

In the actual Dark Ages the Church forbid anyone from reading the Bible and people were executed for speaking out against them. The difference of attitudes between then and now couldn't be greater, last time I checked scientists weren't forbidding people from reading certain texts or killing them because they disagreed with scientists about something. Indeed open inquiry and questioning are at the very foundation of science. You are talking out of your rear end (as usual).

"This new age concept isn't perfect but it's far better than blindly following set dogmatic doctrines and principles like science and religion obviously does. As in science, certain people have used the new age concept to feather their nest, people will be people but is it developing newer ways to become even more destructive like science is obviously doing today."

What New Age concept?? New Age "spirituality" is nothing more than a pick-and-choose buffet of OLD ideas; beliefs can vary significantly from one New Ager to another. Again you make a ridiculous straw-man of science which shows that you either have no understanding of it whatsoever or you are wilfully promoting propaganda. By the way, it is the religious and political extremists who take the fruits of science and abuse them for destructive ends. It makes no more sense to blame science for such things tan it does to blame the store that a murderer bought his gun from.

"New age spirituality is actually about letting go of the destructive factors of the ego altogether, because it’s well known, without the ego we wouldn’t destroy. I suppose how an ideological principle dare be against destruction when science is seemingly primarily supportive of destruction and greed."

Hogwash. New Age is all about ego, it's all about me me me and how can I advance MY well-being and happiness. For all it's faults, at least traditional religion generally requires its followers to give something back and show some sort of discipline. New Age "spirituality" does not implore people to do any such thing.

"It is obvious what the problems are between new age spirituality and other dogmatic ideological principles that are hell bent on destruction and greed, it’s inevitable."

News flash: New Age "spirituality" is just as much based on greed as any traditional religion, maybe more so. Or haven't you seen the plethora of New Age "self-help" books available at any given bookshop?

Ah yes, I often laugh at myself and the rest of humanity. I just shake my head in total disbelief when conversing on sites this one with people who have no idea about any other idea but their own, I do smile quite often when conversing.

I think New age is very hard to explain because you can't put it in one basket like spirituality/religion.

It's new age for us in the west because we haven't experienced the sciences and spiritualties coming together as one before, especially in our own time, very few of us have grown up with this in the west so it's a new age of thinking for us at the cultural level but the concept itself is old.

Although, it needs to be said that when you become fluent in multidimensional language processing, you realize that the Living Universe has an enormous sense of humor! Things get super duper funny/humorous/comedic when you are hearing higher truths! For real!

Guess that's one comedy show that hasn't been canceled in a few billion years!

The ascending into something/Something more/More would be the natural/Nature-al energy of each and ...every... sentient being becoming Enlightened/Conscious, such that as more and more Awaken to the Universal Truth, like the build-up of a wave or tsunami, the energy would become greater and greater, and then with 100% all sentient Enlightenment/Consciousness, toward and then reaching the Core, a gestalt-like phenomenon would kick in, such that the whole would become greater than the sum of its parts.

In this sense no it's not new, very well explained, the reflexion is still the same no matter what.

I think the new age is also about ascending to some higher realm which is suppose to be new, not sure on that either but new age thinking is supposed to be about distancing itself from dogmas and doctrines/concepts, controlling factors of the ego period.

It's such a shame science and spiritual ideologies are being manipulated and used in some quite vial ways, human nature I suppose!!

Most basically, when society, or a group or individual within it, has reflectively questioned itself/himself/herself enough that actual Answers begin to appear, however abstractly, those NOT participating enough to realize the truth in those Answers (and hence not in a position to more highly *process* it/them, label that movement/adherence/energy toward the truth/those Answers "new age," defined by them as some weird, fleeting, make-believe cult popping up to threaten conventional acceptance of itself.

From there, the *stories people tell themselves* about it takes on an "urban dictionary-ish title" for it, "New Age," that religiously becomes a cult of its own, as if by warriors uniting to exterminate (or otherwise celebrate) that labeled movement/adherence/energy.

So really there is nothing "new" about it at all, because all throughout human history people have had no choice but to reflect upon the reflection, if they're breathing, making the relentlessly refreshed energy toward *balance* the ongoing question: "Are we 'there' yet?!"

The full extent of science intellect in these discussions, "(duh).” Now this is clever, probably the most sensible and logical thing I have heard yet, a definite improvement. This coming from someone who doesn't even know what a hypothetical question is it’s certainly an improvement; I must be an absolute moron trying to reason with people who don't know how to reason logically to any extent and think for themselves to begin to with.

This link doesn't work and seems to be only in a generalisation of new age not new age spirituality anyway. Science generalising.......hmmmmm........generalising in science is oversimplifying to me and I thought science was about specifics, I'm wrong again!!

The link does work, just don't copy the colon at the end (duh). Here it is for again for the technologically impaired:

This link doesn't work and seems to be only in a generalisation of new age not new age spirituality anyway. Science generalising.......hmmmmm........generalising in science is oversimplifying to me and I thought science was about specifics, I'm wrong again!!

Sorry but this is very deceptive, I don't like deception........but I suppose that is what science is about these days. I just hope one day science can clean up it's act before it's too late but if the multinationals have their way, science will continue along it's obvious flawed logics and destructive ways.

It is obvious that the dictionaries are once again wrong, would it matter what evidence I came up with to support my claim? If anyone is dogmatic within their own ideological principals, not by the sounds of it so there is obviously no point!!

The religious Dark age; did they not have the same mentality, everything else of any other ideological principle was wrong no matter what evidence one supplied. The similarities between Dark Age religious mentality and modern day science mentality are quite noticeable but only to people who aren't dogmatic it would seem which I find quite interesting. Take a close look at the replies, it says it all I'm afraid.

This new age concept isn't perfect but it's far better than blindly following set dogmatic doctrines and principles like science and religion obviously does. As in science, certain people have used the new age concept to feather their nest, people will be people but is it developing newer ways to become even more destructive like science is obviously doing today.

New age spirituality is actually about letting go of the destructive factors of the ego altogether, because it’s well known, without the ego we wouldn’t destroy. I suppose how an ideological principle dare be against destruction when science is seemingly primarily supportive of destruction and greed.

It is obvious what the problems are between new age spirituality and other dogmatic ideological principles that are hell bent on destruction and greed, it’s inevitable.

It is sad when people try to seriously discus a topic they obviously no little about, it doesn’t say much about their logics I must say!!

"New Age is a catch-all term for a wide range of spiritual and social movements that developed mostly from the Human Potential Movement of the 1960s and 1970s. Characteristic of the New Age movement is the focus on spiritual matters, with emphasis on individuality. These beliefs are often attributed to real or alleged Asian mystics, particularly Indian and Tibetan, and many New Age type beliefs draw heavily from Eastern religions, particularly Buddhism.

"The New Age movement lacks intellectual rigor and shuns scientific approaches to reality, ostensibly due to the perceived separation between science and spirituality, but also under the pretense of postmodern congruity. New Age believers typically take a pick and mix approach to spirituality, adapting beliefs and practices from a wide variety of sources such as Hinduism, Neopaganism, Ufology, Zen, and any other weird concept that is appealing. Particularly if it involves money. "

"If new age spirituality isn't new that would mean modern day science isn't modern would it not?"

Not at all. Epigenetics, subatomic particles, lasers, fibre optics, fMRIs, synthetic fibres, string theory, cybernetics, electronic computers, emergence theory and many many other aspects of modern science would have been utterly inconceivable more than 100-150 years ago.

Please provide examples of ideas from New Age spirituality that are in fact "new".

New age spiritualism is based on a new Age of Aquarius, spiritually aware people using the sciences within their ideologies sciences like psychology and metaphysics for instance. For anyone who doesn’t know, psychology is a new concept of the modern age even though psychology has derived primarily from philosophy as metaphysics and modern day science has to an extent.

WikiNew Age spirituality often makes references to mythological representations of the Earth, Moon, and outer space; the term New Age refers to the current astrological Age of Aquarius.[1]The New Age movement is a Western spiritual movement that developed in the second half of the 20th century. Its central precepts have been described as "drawing on both Eastern and Western spiritual and metaphysical traditions and infusing them with influences from self-help and motivational psychology".

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/metaphysics met•a•phys•ics (mt-fzks)n.1. (used with a sing. verb) Philosophy The branch of philosophy that examines the nature of reality, including the relationship between mind and matter, substance and attribute, fact and value.2. (used with a pl. verb) The theoretical or first principles of a particular discipline: the metaphysics of law.3. (used with a sing. verb) A priori speculation upon questions that are unanswerable to scientific observation, analysis, or experiment.4. (used with a sing. verb) Excessively subtle or recondite reasoning.

To anyone with a fixated blind belief on a particular ideological principle, this of course again is going to be rubbish which will of course once again prove my point about how dogmatism does distort logics within any ideological principle.

I went through this before in relation to how dictionaries where wrong when they proved my points, this is my point about utter flawed logics…….

It is obvious that new age spirituality is a culmination of belief systems which weed out dogmatic doctrines of old spiritual ideologies making it a new concept, of course anyone who is dogmatic within their own praise the lord almighty ideological principles from science to religion, won’t of course psychologically want to see this. This is again a very good indication of flawed logics.

It is obvious that new age spirituality and modern day science primarily evolved from philosophy to one extent or another, both modern day science and the new age movement have evolved from philosophy. I can see how science has evolved from mysticism and philosophy but dogmatic science minded people can't obviously see how the new age spirituality has. This again proves my point about flawed logics within dogmatic science principles.

If new age spirituality isn't new that would mean modern day science isn't modern would it not? See what I mean about flawed logics but the funny thing is, anyone with flawed logics isn't going to see this.....it's quite interesting I must say.

"Extract: First, New Age spirituality originates in eastern religion and astrology. According to astrology, humanity is supposedly moving into a new “Aquarian Age” from the current age of Pisces.[2] Advocates of the New Age Movement are optimistic about this transition, believing that humanity will become enlightened in this “new age” of human experience. Sire writes, “According to the Mayan Calendar a Harmonic Convergence was sched­uled to take place in August 1987.”[3] After this prediction failed to come to fruition, New Agers pointed forward to 2012 as the new date for the end of the Age of Aquarius."

A (new) aquarium age, not an old aquarium age but I supposed if I was to use flawed logics the new in aquarium would seem like old plus a lot of new age thinkers are getting away from dogmatism and doctrines but of course anyone else stuck within their own almighty ideological principles wouldn't know this but they will slam/bash it, not logically sure how though!!

I thought the old Dark Age mentality would have changed within these discussions but it hasn't, it just hasn't evolved........

Science has evolved from old world ideological principals, and to an extent, still uses these same principles, bashing another ideological principle of being old world is highly hypocritical to me, being hypocritical again isn't very logical.......

We're not talking about a "new age", we're talking about New Age SPIRITUALITY. And New Age spirituality is nothing more than a hodge-podge of ideas that have been around for centuries or millennia. There is nothing "new" about it. Borrowed, appropriated and distorted maybe, but nothing which is truly "new" or original.

If you disagree with this, then please provide examples of ideas from New Age spirituality that are in fact "new".

Wow, this is why I don't try to get into conversations with any who praises a one almighty ideological principle as being the be and end all, I'm just not into dogmatism. The similarities between religious dogmatism and science dogmatism are uncanny mainly because they have the same mentality obviously as shown here quite plainly.

Anyone who enters into a conversation about another ideological principles, obviously knowing nothing about that ideological principle to start with and tries to make out they do isn’t credible, but when the same person slams/bashes such ideologies as well……..it just proves my point about flawed logics.

“According to astrology, humanity is supposedly moving into a new “Aquarian Age” from the current age of Pisces.”

This clearly states new age spirituality is a new age which was predicted hundreds of years ago, it’s a new age predicted not a an old age.

Flawed logics: Just because the age of Aquarius was predicted hundreds of years ago some people use an obvious flawed logics to determine that because it was predicted a hundred years ago it’s has to be of old ideology. So this would mean when various people predicted the industrial age hundreds of years before it happened, this makes the industrial age of old principles hundreds of years before it occurred. Thank God I don’t reason like this!!

It is so obvious how flawed this kind of logics is and it once again proves my point about how dogmatism corrupts logics making it flawed.

Modern day science uses theories, inductive reasoning, it philosophies before deductively evaluating such philosophies/theories, how old is philosophy, how old is the ideological principles that modern day science evolved from? Using the obvious flawed logics of some people on this site, modern day science is also of old ideologies and should be discounted as well.

I’m just utterly dumbfounded at some people’s logics, this is no different to being in a discussion with religious fanatics mainly because of how dogmatism corrupts such logics within any ideology. I must be an idiot discussing anything with fanatics………

"Extract: First, New Age spirituality originates in eastern religion and astrology. According to astrology, humanity is supposedly moving into a new “Aquarian Age” from the current age of Pisces.[2] Advocates of the New Age Movement are optimistic about this transition, believing that humanity will become enlightened in this “new age” of human experience. Sire writes, “According to the Mayan Calendar a Harmonic Convergence was sched­uled to take place in August 1987.”[3] After this prediction failed to come to fruition, New Agers pointed forward to 2012 as the new date for the end of the Age of Aquarius."

Good god Mathew, where do I even begin?? First of all the opening sentence of this extract says that New Age spirituality comes from eastern religion and astrology, both of which have been around for millennia (as has the idea of an upcoming Aquarian age). The only way we could regard these things as new is if we broaden the definition of "new" to the point of meaninglessness! Secondly the only thing even remotely new about the Mayan Calendar is the New Age movement's grossly distorted interpretation of it. Thirdly the extract itself admits that New Agers' prediction of a "Harmonic Convergence" in 1987 turned out to be wrong. Fourthly, the much-anticipated 2012 date has come and gone without anything happening. Finally the extract isn't even consistent about basic facts - it says in the last line that 2012 is the end of the Age of Aquarius, when it's supposed to be *start* of the Age of Aquarius!

"Not sure how some people’s flawed logics get nothing new out of a new age that is supposed to arrive, new age spirituality is about a new age not an old age!!"

Again, the idea of an Age of Aquarius is not new. But we're not talking about a "new age", we're talking about New Age SPIRITUALITY. And New Age spirituality is nothing more than a hodge-podge of ideas that have been around for centuries or millennia. There is nothing "new" about it. Borrowed, appropriated and old maybe, but nothing which is truly "new" or original.

"All I can say is I’m so right about flawed logics within set ideological principles."

And all I can say is that you're so wrong about being so right. If anyone here has "flawed logics", it's you!

Seen as some people have no idea what they are talking about when discussing new age spirituality I will enlighten them.

http://www.evidenceunseen.com/world-religions/new-age-spirituality/

Extract: First, New Age spirituality originates in eastern religion and astrology. According to astrology, humanity is supposedly moving into a new “Aquarian Age” from the current age of Pisces.[2] Advocates of the New Age Movement are optimistic about this transition, believing that humanity will become enlightened in this “new age” of human experience. Sire writes, “According to the Mayan Calendar a Harmonic Convergence was sched­uled to take place in August 1987.”[3] After this prediction failed to come to fruition, New Agers pointed forward to 2012 as the new date for the end of the Age of Aquarius.

Not sure how some people’s flawed logics get nothing new out of a new age that is supposed to arrive, new age spirituality is about a new age not an old age!!

Flawed logics again; how does anyone enter into a discussion that they absolutely have no idea of? This is the problem of praising up to one almighty ideological principle as being our saviour, life itself is defined by more than one ideological principle but I only know this as I don’t praise one almighty ideological principle as the be and end all, I consider all principles to have some kind of value….. All I can say is I’m so right about flawed logics within set ideological principles.

It is obvious that people who only read and study up on other people’s thoughts, in relation to a particular ideology, have no idea about any other ideology that they slam, how illogical is this!!

@Silverghost:"New age just means new thought which is a lot better than some religions and their stagnated thoughts. It's so easy to bag a new thought process which happened to science as it evolved, many science techniques and theories were bagged by other scientists that we use today."

So-called "New Age" thought really isn't that new. There is nothing new about believing in a life force, or astrology, or the power of crystals, or alternative medicine. If anything it should be called "Old Age" thought.

Like any good ideological principle, it evolves like science evolved from mysticism and philosophy to some extent.

New age just means new thought which is a lot better than some religions and their stagnated thoughts. It's so easy to bag a new thought process which happened to science as it evolved, many science techniques and theories were bagged by other scientists that we use today.

Bagging progressive thinking is pretty dumb to me......As along as the ideological principles within these new thoughts aren't dogmatic, I really can't see a problem.

Scientists should know better than to spontaneously buy into the collective unconscious convention's misinterpretations and naïve usages of language/concepts, along with the stories they tell themselves around those concepts that unfortunately breathe life into them, adopting all that chaos as the "authority" science needs to debunk such concepts, to continue on its own misguided path!

Scientists are people, too, and first, and trying to figure out science/the universe using their own unconscious brains/minds to do that is why their invented "soft science" gets laughed and degraded away, and why Answers available to them, Now, are instead repeatedly proposed to be "centuries" away.

Whether looking under a microscope or gazing far out into the cosmos, the Ultimate Universal Answers ALL have to forever be filtered through their own minds, inescapably, so if scientists don't bother to learn about themselves and how THEY work, first, everything else will forever remain....missed.

And with millions, billions, dying, while they learn to get their act together, that is nothing/Nothing to laugh about!

The concept "New Age" has consistently been used in marketing, the media and throughout popular culture to refer to any movement toward, or otherwise the debunking of, Enlightenment/Consciousness. Walk into a music store and you'll find entire large sections of "New Age" CDs and concert DVDs of groups or individuals singing entire albums full of songs about Enlightenment, ranging from those produced by folks who truly do *realize* what they're talking/singing about and the importance of their message, to varying degrees of folks still learning what it's all about but are at least leaning in the direction of healthy balance.

Extremely famous creators of major movies and theater productions borrow from "New Age" to produce incredibly brilliant story lines and scores trying to reawaken the world to the true Universal Process. Thousands of books are written about it, and off-springs include worldwide yoga studios, meditation centers and relaxation retreats.

But when it gets to collective unconscious convention it all becomes a big joke, something to laugh about and berate and use as fuel to degrade any suggestion that there is a VERY REAL, VERY PROFOUND MESSAGE behind it, that needs to be heard, attended to, legitimized and believed.

Likewise, concepts such as mysticism, metaphysical, transcendence, etc. actually refer to the genuine physics (the REAL physics) of the Universal Process, but are, again, used by naïve convention to laugh themselves back into distraction.

Science itself has inadvertently bought into and adopted the collective unconscious convention's misuse and abuse of language such as these to do its own laughing and berating, totally missing that the TRUE usages of these expressions hold PRECISELY the very Answers/Universal Processes scientists around the world are desperately searching for!

Well they're not using garlic anymore they've got UV rounds now. Some people reduce and isolate ideas or concepts which they don't like or are threatened by in some way. It's just a perverted view of reality from a lack of alignment with the mind.

Is this REALLY about what anyone personally "thinks" new ageism "is," or what "New Age" actually has become to mean. The term of course refers to a movement. "The New Age movement is a Western spiritual movement that developed in the second half of the 20th century." What the "movement" includes and does not include might be open to examination but what's the point?

Perhaps the poster of this question can provide some concrete examples that supports the contention that the term "is being used like garlic to Dracula around the boards."

I think New Age, is any para-materialist content which is liberated from the primordial paradigm of the human religious impulse, largely animated by the intuitive right brain hemisphere, little constrained nor supported by the left hemisphere nor the sometimes profitable forces of the R-complex.

Beyond religion, beyond materialism, beyond New Age, is this new Noetic thing, which is this next inevitable step of scientific understanding, this breaking out of science beyond the materialist presumption, overtaking that which was mystical, and rather making it something measured, modeled, something understood.